中國的電動汽車不斷提升，這讓其他地方的競爭對手感到擔憂
China’s Electric Cars Keep Improving, a Worry for Rivals Elsewhere
譯文簡介
我想汽車行業(yè)應(yīng)該早點認真對待它。
正文翻譯
China’s Electric Cars Keep Improving, a Worry for Rivals Elsewhere
中國的電動汽車不斷提升，這讓其他地方的競爭對手感到擔憂
中國的電動汽車不斷提升，這讓其他地方的競爭對手感到擔憂
評論翻譯
很贊 ( 26 )
收藏
I guess the car industry should have taken it seriously much sooner.
我想汽車行業(yè)應(yīng)該早點認真對待它。
But… but… we have affordable $75k SUVs for the middle class…
但是......但是......我們?yōu)橹挟a(chǎn)階級提供“負擔得起”的7萬5千美元的 SUV......
Only a $1200/mo payment! 15% APR for 10 years, you can’t find a better deal!
每月“只需”支付 1200 美元！15% 的年利率，10 年期，你找不到比這更劃算的了！
lol. I’m shipping VW ID4s from China to LATAM for 25k a pop
哈哈。我把大眾 ID4 從中國運到拉丁美洲，每輛 2.5 萬元。
Wut?
啥？
They're shipping VW ID4s from China to LATAM for 25k a pop
他們正在以每輛2.5 萬的價格將大眾 ID4 從中國運送到拉丁美洲
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://nxnpts.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
Wat?
哈？
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://nxnpts.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
THEY ARE SHIPPING SHIT FRIM CHINA WAY CHEAPER!
他說他們從中國運來的東西都要便宜得多！
They kinda spurred it. China wanted to develop a local auto industry like Korea and Japan did so it required foreign automakers to form partnerships with local companies and share tech in exchange for market access. Foreign companies were successful at not sharing much tech and still getting access, something China realized early on and decided it was better to start working on the next big technological evolution in the industry while it’s still early instead of trying to catch up on an outdated tech that’s getting banned left and right in 15-30 years.
這也算是一種刺激。中國希望像韓國和日本一樣發(fā)展本土汽車產(chǎn)業(yè)，因此要求外國汽車制造商與本土公司建立合作關(guān)系，共享技術(shù)以換取市場準入。中國很早就意識到了這一點，并決定與其努力追趕 15-30 年后會被不斷禁用的過時技術(shù)，不如趁早開始研究汽車行業(yè)的下一個重大技術(shù)演進。
That’s part of it, also China is a net importer of oil and with car sales increasing it would be massively dependent on external geopolitical factors and supply constraints. It makes it much better for China if they can use electricity generated at home vs imported oil.
這只是原因之一，另外，中國是石油凈進口國，隨著汽車銷量的增加，這將在很大程度上取決于外部地緣政治因素和供應(yīng)限制。如果中國能使用本國生產(chǎn)的電力，而不是進口的石油，這對中國來說會好得多。
They use a lot of coal to generate that electricity and import a lot of it.
他們使用大量煤炭發(fā)電，并大量進口煤炭。
That’s also something that can be changed though. They can and are building solar and nuclear and be less dependent on other countries.
If they added 200m ICE cars they would be dependent on foreign oils until they eventually switched away from ICE cars.
So instead they’ve built high speed rails and an EV industry.
但這也是可以改變的。他們可以而且正在建設(shè)太陽能和核能，從而減少對其他國家的依賴。
如果他們增加 2 億輛內(nèi)燃機汽車，他們就會依賴外國石油，直到最終放棄內(nèi)燃機汽車。
因此，他們建立了高速鐵路和電動汽車產(chǎn)業(yè)。
Yeah, they’ve also built (and are building, or plan to build, literally all stages) like 90% of the worlds solar, wind and nuclear in the last 6 years
是的，在過去的 6 年里，他們還建造了（并且正在建造或計劃建造，實際上是所有階段）世界上 90% 的太陽能、風能和核能
Let's use the US as a comparison. There are hundreds of millions of cars on the roads and tens of thousands of larger scale electricity plants.
If you're going to stop importing fossil fuels which one of those two consumption demands is easier to change to a renewable source?
EVs are basically a flex fuel car because they don't care where the electricity comes from.
讓我們以美國為例。道路上有數(shù)以億計的汽車，還有數(shù)以萬計的大型發(fā)電廠。
如果要停止進口化石燃料，這兩種消費需求中哪一種更容易轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)榭稍偕茉矗?br /> 電動汽車基本上是一種柔性燃料汽車，因為它們不在乎電力來自哪里。
Also, didn't China make huge public investments in stuff like LiFePO early on? Meanwhile western elites were crying and screeching about picking winners and losers and distorting the free market.
另外，中國不是很早就在磷酸鐵鋰等領(lǐng)域進行了巨額公共投資嗎？與此同時，西方精英們卻在哭天喊地，大談優(yōu)勝劣汰、扭曲自由市場。
It does help that china also is the largest battery manufacturers.
中國也是最大的電池制造商，這一點確實很有幫助。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://nxnpts.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
Another thing was that the ev car revolution allowed kind of a new race and a much more even playing field versus battling existing ICE cars
另一件事是，與現(xiàn)有的內(nèi)燃機汽車相比，電動汽車革命帶來了一種新的比賽和更公平的競爭環(huán)境
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://nxnpts.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
Malaysia did it and so …
馬來西亞也干了，但是......
They did it much earlier, and their auto industry never caught up to the industry leaders, they just created two companies that were OK at fulfilling local demand with low-mid range vehicles that were either based on foreign models, licensed copies of them, or inferior local models. There’s a reason Proton and their other car company are not household names outside Malaysia like Kia or Nissan are, or even BYD is becoming now.
他們做得更早，但他們的汽車工業(yè)卻從未趕上行業(yè)領(lǐng)先者，他們只是創(chuàng)建了兩家公司，但這些公司在滿足本地需求方面還算可以，它們生產(chǎn)的中低端汽車要么是基于外國車型，要么是外國車型的授權(quán)仿制品，要么是劣質(zhì)的本地車型。這就是為什么寶騰和他們的另一家汽車公司不像起亞或日產(chǎn)那樣在馬來西亞以外家喻戶曉，甚至不像比亞迪現(xiàn)在正在變得家喻戶曉的原因。
"It takes all her running just to stay in place." -Lewis Carroll
Sounds to me that American car companies stopped trying to keep up.
“她需要全力以赴才能保持地位?！甭芬姿?卡羅爾
在我看來，美國汽車公司已經(jīng)不再試圖跟上時代的步伐了。
They simply can’t keep up
他們根本跟不上
They could have kept up - if they hadn't spent decades trying to deny that alternatives to ICE existed.
Their current failures are a result of their own decisions, not the result of some structural flaw which makes them less capable.
他們本可以跟上——如果他們沒有花費數(shù)十年時間試圖否認內(nèi)燃機車的替代品存在的話。
他們目前的失敗是他們自己決定的結(jié)果，而不是因為某些結(jié)構(gòu)性缺陷導(dǎo)致他們能力下降。
Also, for 50 years American car companies have ran on “made in America” instead of making better cars than the next company. They get bailed out by the gov and put taxes on imports instead of making a better car.
Prime example: Harley Davidson. I know it’s not a car company but they’re the epitome of “an American vehicle.” Gov bailed them out of a bankruptcy in the 80’s because they couldn’t compete with imports. So imports were tariffed in anything bigger than ~800cc’s. Then imports just dumped R&D into small motorcycles. To this day Craigslist is full of old Yamahas and bmws. And Harley had to get bailed out again. And also sued because they didn’t even offer modern brakes in new motorcycles. Their motto is “America’s Chopper” and they aren’t even made here, they’re made in Mexico.
Same trend with other vehicle companies. If you look at where parts are coming from, where they’re assembled, who’s building them… the Honda accord or Toyota tundra is the most American built car. American car companies have been coasting on their “American made” reputations for a half century now and it’s losing its fizz and not even really true.
此外，50 年來，美國汽車公司一直以“美國制造”為噱頭，而不是制造比其他公司更好的汽車。他們得到政府的救助，對進口汽車征稅，而不是制造更好的汽車。
最典型的例子： 哈雷戴維森。我知道這不是一家汽車公司，但他們是“美國汽車”的縮影。上世紀 80 年代，由于無法與進口車競爭，政府將其從破產(chǎn)中解救出來。因此，進口車被征收關(guān)稅，凡是排量大于 800cc 的車型都是如此。然后，進口商就把研發(fā)投入到了小型摩托車上。時至今日，Craigslist（二手網(wǎng)站） 上到處都是二手雅馬哈和寶馬。哈雷不得不再次獲得救助。他們還被起訴，因為他們甚至沒有在新摩托車上提供現(xiàn)代制動器。他們的座右銘是“美國的摩托車”，但他們甚至都不是在這里生產(chǎn)的，而是在墨西哥生產(chǎn)的。
其他汽車公司也有同樣的趨勢。如果你看看零部件從哪里來、在哪里組裝、誰在制造......本田 accord 或豐田 tundra 才是最美國制造的汽車。半個世紀以來，美國汽車公司一直依賴于 "美國制造 "的聲譽，但這一聲譽正在逐漸消失，甚至不再真實。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://nxnpts.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
Mostly true, but there are also some perverse factors. China's EVs are legitimately decent on their own, but I still wouldn't want 996 work hours and being shot for unxizing to be even just one of the reasons they're competitive.
And now I'll pull a complete whiplash on you - this is why we need massive international trade deals with these countries. We should give each other access to our markets, but the deal for that should be, say, not imprisoning people when they demand better hours or more safety. Reciprocal and fair, of course, us westerners should also promise to not brutalize workers just the same.
大部分是正確的，但也有一些不正當?shù)囊蛩亍Ｖ袊碾妱悠嚤旧泶_實不錯，但我仍然不希望看到 996 的工作時間和因加入工會而被槍斃——這甚至只是他們具有競爭力的原因之一。
現(xiàn)在我要對你的論點進行徹底的顛覆——這就是為什么我們需要與這些國家達成大規(guī)模的國際貿(mào)易協(xié)議。我們應(yīng)該讓彼此進入我們的市場，但這樣做的協(xié)議應(yīng)該是，比如說，當人們要求更好的工作時間或更多的安全時，不要把他們關(guān)進監(jiān)獄。當然，互惠和公平，我們西方人也應(yīng)該承諾不會同樣殘酷地對待工人。
I think the running theory is that making electric vehicles vs. making ICE vehicles are two completely separate ventures. It'd be like Hasbro pivoting from board games to video games. They could've done it but it would've required them to start from the ground up. They didn't want to spend the capital and man power while neglecting their current profit model.
我認為目前的理論是，制造電動汽車與制造內(nèi)燃機汽車是兩個完全不同的企業(yè)。這就好比孩之寶公司從桌面游戲轉(zhuǎn)向視頻游戲。他們本可以這樣做，但這需要他們從頭開始。他們不想在花費資金和人力的同時忽視現(xiàn)有的盈利模式。
US abandoned the affordable car, someone else will fill the gap
美國放棄了經(jīng)濟實惠的汽車，別人來填補空白
Didn't this happen with Japanese cars in the 70s?
70 年代的日本汽車不也是這樣嗎？
Exactly this. People need reliable cheap transportation. The US manufactures only want to sell high margin vehicles. It's like home builders only building luxury homes and apartments. There needs to be volume incentives.
With the Section 179 changes hopefully we'll see some changes in the car market. If the tax deduction gets changed for the gvwr and the cap is applied then there is less of an incentive to buy monster trucks that cost 100k. A 25k cap would incentivise "low cost" fleet purchases instead of trying to maximizing the tax offset.
正是如此。人們需要可靠的廉價交通工具。美國制造商只想銷售高利潤的汽車。這就像房屋建筑商只建造豪華住宅和公寓一樣。需要有對走量的激勵措施。
隨著179條款的修改，希望我們能看到汽車市場的一些變化。如果對總重量的減稅額度進行調(diào)整，并設(shè)置上限，那么購買售價 10 萬的怪獸卡車的動力就會減弱。2.5 萬的上限可以鼓勵“低成本”汽車的銷售，而不是鼓勵民眾去試圖最大限度地抵稅。
Don't worry, US Auto manufacturers will just lobby for insane tariffs on Chinese vehicles
別擔心，美國汽車制造商只會游說對中國汽車征收瘋狂的關(guān)稅
There are so many producers in China selling EVs that there is a massive price war, this is spurring on even more demand as more people can no afford an electric car. This demand is lowering costs of batteries, due to economies of scale and battery prices are dropping. EVs will take a massive market share in China in the next 5 years or so.
中國有如此多的生產(chǎn)商在銷售電動汽車，以至于出現(xiàn)了大規(guī)模的價格戰(zhàn)，這刺激了更多的需求，因為越來越多的人買得起電動汽車。由于規(guī)模經(jīng)濟效應(yīng)，這種需求降低了電池成本，電池價格也隨之下降。未來五年左右，電動汽車將在中國占據(jù)巨大的市場份額。
Isn't this literally the free market? I thought everyone had to respect and defend it, no matter what?
這不就是自由市場嗎？我以為無論如何，每個人都必須尊重和捍衛(wèi)它？
It's only a free market if it allows the western upper classes to get richer. They very quickly change their attitude if it backfires and hurts their bottom line.
I'm getting lixedin posts now from senior pharma execs, stating how shocked they are about IP issues in China and how western inspectors who go to inspect their suppliers are now at risk of being arrested on espionage grounds.
Are they fucking stupid? Did they really believe the post Berlin wall hype of trade creating a free and open world right up until 2024?
只有讓西方上層社會變得更富有，這才是自由市場。如果適得其反，損害了他們的底線，他們很快就會改變態(tài)度。
我在領(lǐng)英上看到一些制藥公司的高級管理人員發(fā)帖，說他們對中國的知識產(chǎn)權(quán)問題感到非常震驚，還說去檢查供應(yīng)商的西方檢查人員現(xiàn)在有可能因間諜罪而被捕。
他們是傻子嗎？難道他們真的相信了柏林墻倒塌后關(guān)于貿(mào)易將在 2024 年前創(chuàng)造一個自由開放世界的炒作？
Huawei overtook Samsung and Apple to be number 1 phone maker, shortly after that the free market leader tried everything in its arsenal, including but not limited to banning it from google, banning its suppliers from selling to it, and getting Canada to literally kidnap its CFO off a plane and falsely imprison her for 3 years to try and kill it.
Tik Tok operates in the U.S., follows all U.S. laws, hosts its U.S. user data in the U.S. with a U.S. company (oracle), but they were bombing U.S. billionaire social medias out so the free market leaders made a law specifically to target the company, not the issues surrounding social media.
"Free" market. lol
It's never about what's good for the average citizen, it's always been about what's good for the billionaires.
華為超越三星和蘋果成為第一大手機制造商后不久，這個自由市場的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者就使出了渾身解數(shù)，包括但不限于禁止華為使用谷歌、禁止華為的供應(yīng)商向華為銷售產(chǎn)品，還讓加拿大把華為的首席財務(wù)官從飛機上綁架下來，誣陷她入獄三年，試圖扼殺華為。
Tik Tok 在美國運營，遵守所有美國法律，其美國用戶數(shù)據(jù)由一家美國公司（oracle）托管，但他們卻把美國億萬富翁社交媒體炸了個稀巴爛，因此自由市場的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者專門制定了一項針對該公司的法律，而不是圍繞社交媒體的問題。
“自由”市場。哈哈哈。
從來都不是什么對普通公民有利的事，一直都是對億萬富翁有利的事。
TikTok is banned in China. So is FB, Google Search, Wikipedia, Insta, Spotify, Twitter, etc.
How is this fair? Why MUST the US allow China to install software on every phone in the US? Fuck ‘em.
TikTok在中國被禁止。FB、谷歌搜索、維基百科、Insta、Spotify、Twitter 等也是如此。
這公平嗎？為什么美國必須允許中國在美國的每部手機上安裝軟件？去你的吧。
FB, google, wiki, insta, spotify twitter aren't banned in China because they're American. They're banned because they don't follow Chinese laws which govern all social media that operate there, including their own, which is why they also banned Tik Tok which is a Chinese company.
Tik Tok follows U.S. laws but it's the only social media of its kind that's targetted due to its country or origin.
It seems like this nuance flies over your and a majority of this sub's head which makes me question the level of education and IQ remaining on this site.
And we are talking about free trade, free trade denotes that if you follow a jurisdication's laws which are reasonable and fair, you should be allowed to operate there.
Try to keep up here.
FB、谷歌、維基、Insta、Spotify、Twitter 在中國被禁并不是因為它們是美國的。它們之所以被禁，是因為它們不遵守中國的法律，而中國的法律管轄著所有在中國運營的社交媒體，包括它們自己的媒體，這就是為什么它們也禁止了 Tik Tok 這家中國公司。
Tik Tok 遵循美國法律，但它是同類社交媒體中唯一一個因其國家或原籍而被針對的社交媒體。
你和大多數(shù)本版的人似乎都不了解這種細微差別，這讓我對這個網(wǎng)站的教育水平和智商產(chǎn)生了懷疑。
我們在談?wù)撟杂少Q(mào)易，自由貿(mào)易意味著如果你遵守一個司法管轄區(qū)的合理和公平的法律，你就應(yīng)該被允許在那里經(jīng)營。
多了解一點再來學(xué)人評論。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://nxnpts.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
It’s not entirely equivalent.
China didn’t ban them. Google, FB, etc. refused to adhere to China’s rules, so they left. If they adhered to the rules, they could have done business there.
China’s rules apply to all companies.
If there are sweeping privacy laws that all companies in America must adhere to, that would be great, it means ensuring Chinese companies (or any company) would be equivalently impacted.
But as it stands, America picks and chooses how laws are applied, and how it targets specific companies and industries.
Examples include Boeing vs Airbus, Japanese tariffs, the chicken tax, sugar tax vs. Mexico…and so on and so on. Ironically enough, all crony capitalistic policies that is karma biting back. From Boeing issues, high fructose corn syrup in everything, truck price gouging, etc…
Americans have been sold free market dreams, but is wildly hypocritical in many aspects.
這并不完全等同。
中國沒有禁止它們。谷歌、FB 等公司拒絕遵守中國的規(guī)則，所以它們離開了。如果他們遵守規(guī)則，他們本可以在中國開展業(yè)務(wù)。
中國的規(guī)則適用于所有公司。
如果美國制定了所有公司都必須遵守的全面隱私法，那就太好了，這意味著確保中國公司（或任何公司）都會受到同等影響。
但目前的情況是，美國在如何適用法律、如何針對特定公司和行業(yè)方面是有針對性的。
例如波音與空客、日本關(guān)稅、對墨西哥的雞肉稅和糖稅......等等。諷刺的是，所有的裙帶資本主義政策都是因果報應(yīng)。從波音公司問題、在所有產(chǎn)品中添加高果糖玉米糖漿、卡車價格欺詐等等......
美國人一直被灌輸自由市場的夢想，但在很多方面都是虛偽的。
We want affordable EVs and if they have to be sold from China, so be it. Free market.
我們想要負擔得起的電動汽車，如果它們必須來自中國，那就這樣吧。自由市場。
No need for rivals to worry. When it’s time to worry, we’ll hear some vaguely worded statements about National Security (TM) and bans would follow soon. This is a country that used National Security as a reason to sanction Canadian aluminum imports not long ago. Even the EU is scared this time and thinking about protectionist measures because they have a huge auto industry of their own that can’t compete with Chinese EVs on either tech or price at this time because China has a 10-15 year head start on investing in EVs.
競爭對手無需擔心。到了該擔心的時候，我們會聽到一些措辭含糊的關(guān)于“國家安全”的聲明，禁令很快就會接踵而至。不久前，這個國家還曾以國家安全為由制裁加拿大的鋁進口。就連歐盟這次也害怕了，正在考慮采取保護主義措施，因為他們自己也有龐大的汽車產(chǎn)業(yè)，但目前在技術(shù)和價格上都無法與中國的電動汽車競爭，因為中國在電動汽車投資上已經(jīng)領(lǐng)先了 10-15 年。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://nxnpts.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
They can try but countries without an automotive industry don't give a fuck about Americans and Europeans whining about losing. They can ban the import of Chinese cars but they'll still lose massive profits from the global market and China's market itself. It's a pointless endeavor.
他們可以試一試，但沒有汽車工業(yè)的國家才不會在乎美國人和歐洲人對失敗的抱怨。他們可以禁止進口中國汽車，但他們?nèi)匀粫娜蚴袌龊椭袊袌霰旧硎ゴ罅坷麧櫋＿@是毫無意義的掙扎。